I applaud your willingness to question this religion. Never lose that. Question everything. With that said, you are asking a very good question: If Christianity is true, why must Christian apologists lie to win a debate? Years ago, this is what made me question creationism; I knew creationists lied about evolutionists' claims and evidence. If creationism were true, I knew that it should be able to stand on its own feet without having to lie about what the facts are. If a religion claims to promote truth, why would it lie? If all the evidence supports the religion (as it would if the religion were true), why would its proponents need to falsify information to make their points? This should always throw up flags, as it has for you. You are a far more intelligent young man than most. Keep up your search, and I am confident you will be very happy with where it takes you.

(August 27, 2012 at 10:57 am)greneknight Wrote: I'm still in school so I'm not exactly familiar with all the arguments in favour of religion. But I've seen almost every debate on youtube between Christians and atheists and I always go away feeling very uneasy about Christian apologists. The truth is they tell lies.

Currently the most formidable Christian apologist must be William Lane Craig. I must have seen every debate that he has ever fought and there are a lot. Why am I not delighted every time I see him take his opponent apart? I'm not just a Christian but I'm an altar boy in my church so naturally, I should be pleased with Craig.

Craig is a liar and a very good one too. I can sit down and analyse all his debates and in every one of them, I (yes, even I) have spotted huge flaws and worse, deliberate lies but he does it so well that his opponent is none the wiser.

The most recent debate that I saw between Craig and a Muslim chap called Ally was good. Ally was much better and I thought he took the wind out of Craig's sail.

What I have seen of such debates led me to the conclusion that there is no rational argument for God and the Christian faith. Those who want to remain in the faith should be honest about it and admit that faith is totally blind and irrational.

greneknight

Just out of curiosity, given your conclusion, why are you still a Christian?

(August 27, 2012 at 11:27 am)EscapingDelusion Wrote: I have seen several Hitchens debates where he appeared to get flustered, sweat, and stumble. I have also seen debates where he ripped his opponents apart. My best guess is that everyone has good and bad days.

...I would also like to see his debate with Ehrman. I've read much of Ehrman's work, and he is one of the most intelligent biblical researchers I have read. I find it odd that anyone could win a debate against him, as he most certainly knows his stuff inside and out...

No, I didn't think Ehrman lost in that debate but Craig made it seem so. It was whether the resurrection of Christ was a historical fact. Craig came up with a silly equation that made the resurrection a 98% certainty.

---

(August 27, 2012 at 11:34 am)genkaus Wrote: Just out of curiosity, given your conclusion, why are you still a Christian?

Religion is largely cultural. Also, it's based on faith and faith is irrational. I know most priests in my church are aware that the virgin birth comes from a mistake in translation. The Archbishop of Canterbury has ruled that new believers should not be made to accept the virgin birth for conversion. But we still say the Creed and nobody amends it to leave out the virgin birth. You can't do that because it's very hard to change religion.

Many Christians today don't accept the existence of hell. But we still say in the Creed that Christ descended into hell. Things don't change much in religion because it's cultural. Truth is not an absolute thing in culture.

Quote:Why must Christian apologists tell lies?

Because reality is against them.

More specifically, every argument for the existence of God is either fallacious or founded on premises most of us would reject as silly. Without that, their only problem would be that there's no evidence proportionate to the claim that God exists to support it. It's simply impossible to argue for Christianity or any other supernaturalist religion honestly. What you can do honestly is what greneknight has done: acknowledge that evidence and reason aren't on their side, and that they trust in their faith because they want to.

Craig doesn't win debates. The opposition loses by agreeing to debate his arguments, which he debates at every debate.

He focuses on areas that cannot be proven nor disproven.

I was simply joking, dude. I'm not going to read your link. I don't want to have any part in a religious discussion just now.

I will, however, comment on this:

(August 27, 2012 at 4:58 pm)Atom Wrote: My personal opinion is that Dr. Craig wins a lot more debates than he would if his opponents stayed professional and didn't get distracted trying to mock and attack Christians and their beliefs.

Christian beliefs are just so silly that it really is difficult not to mock them.